Bill wasn’t half the player Clyde was, clearly. And while what I’m going to say is true, there won’t be enough “evidence” here to convince anyone who stubbornly resists it. And it’s possible you have to be at least 40 to really get this. And it is a bit of a stuffy, fussy thing and it can be resisted on that basis. And this idea won’t have anything to do with Clyde in particular.

However ….

The idea of training the body as well as the mind as the basis of a proper education has deep roots, going all the way back to Ancient Greece. It still had a lot of sway in America in the early 1900s — it was from that idea that in fact the concept of the “student-athlete” arose. It still had that sway, though not as much, when Bill came along. With his Princeton background and obvious real intellect and obvious high-end, though not elite, basketball talent, he really personified the classical ideal of mind and body. That buttressed his reputation by *a lot* and spilled over into misinterpeting how good a basketball player he was. But he wasn’t being viewed as solely a basketball player.

What’s happened since then culturally? Well, first, it’s now possible and has been for decades, but not really as much so in Bill/Clyde’s era to make a massively great living focusing solely on sports. And so what happens then? People focus on sports and blow off the mind part. Perfectly understandable. Second, the culture is more obsessed about sports and more forgiving of obsessive, non-well-rounded types. Third, we had the somewhat phony denigration of the model by education professionals and anti-NCAA types. Fourth, we had companies like ESPN and the shoe companies and all the rest who took over college sports and remade them in their quasi-professional TV star image. None of those places gives a fig about the classical model, as their mass audience doesn’t give a fig either. (Which was the chicken and which the egg is up for debate.)

So I’m not sure I really have a problem with rewarding and honoring a Bill Bradley for these non-basketball things — in fact, I might even think it’s a good thing — but, yeah, obviously in pure basketball terms he’s overrated.

Crazy that Bill went in before Walt.

Bradley is another example of the non-NBA aspects having a bigger impact. He had a really good college career at Princeton, and was even more famous making Oxford’s basketball team a real team, and then won a title in Europe and a Gold Medal. Only two players have ever won a European title, an NBA title and a Gold medal, and the other guy was also a first ballot Hall of Famer.

But yes, in general, there should just be an NBA Hall of Fame to take those other considerations out of, you know, consideration (and by the way, Melo’s success outside of the NBA is why he was a no-brainer first ballot Hall of Famer years ago. Dude has three gold medals!!!).

Yao Ming?

Remember, it’s not the NBA Hall of Fame, so Ming’s fame outside of the States made him a shoo-in.

As an aside, also a general reminder that there really should be an NBA Hall of Fame.

What, Clyde wasn’t first ballot?

Not even close, oddly enough. He didn’t get in until 1987.

Bill Bradley over every Knick on those teams?

Watch out, Alan, you might become targeted on MSG’s cameras for eviction if you become more recognizable! “Sorry, Mr. Sepinwall, we’ve read all of your Knickerblogger comments and that’s just not going to work for us.”

My best guess is that it was Leon Rose wearing the Knicks hat and he was actually saying something about wanting to trade for John Wall. He probably said something like “Siri, is Rich Paul still reppin’ Wall?”, and, being a typical adolescent narcissist, your son thought Leon was talking about him.